Aims of This Book
This book is intended to produce a clear argument for advocating the participation of more men in early childhood education . This is especially necessary, given the current push for mixed-gender staff teams to work with young children. This initiative is currently coming from practitioners, policymakers and academics alike in the UK, where I am based (Department for Education [DfE] 2017), and in many European countries (Peeters et al. 2015). However, the underlying reasons that are produced to justify this desired change vary considerably. It is timely to examine what these rationales are and understand the cultural and political forces that shape them. Indeed, some early childhood education managers have suggested to me that there is a need for a script so that advocates for âmore menâ have a clear argument, based on theory and research. This book will build the presentation of a script that will optimise the presence of men in early childhood education and care (ECEC) settings to challenge gender practices and pedagogies to dissolve the gender binary.
At the time of writing there is a phenomenal groundswell of gender-focused interest, in the media, on social media and in the conversation of friends, family and colleagues. There have been two sea changes that have brought this about. Firstly, there is now a huge growth in our awareness and understanding of transgender . TV programmes and newspaper articles have presented the stories of children and young adults who have made the transition to become a member of the âoppositeâ sex with a doubling of referrals to Londonâs Tavistock Centre for those who feel they are in the âwrong bodyâ(Vollans 2016). More and more people are beginning to recognise that the traditional categories of âgirlâ, âboyâ, âmanâ and âwomanâ are too straightjacketing to capture peopleâs gender-fluid feelings, experiences and identities. An interesting recent study from Bragg et al. (2018), carried out in England, reports that many young people in the 12â14 age group now have âexpanded vocabularies of gender identity/expressionâ (p. 1), and commitments to gender equality , diversity and the rights of gender and sexual minorities. Recognition and acceptance of transgender is therefore a giant step in the direction of a transformation to a less gender-rigid society.
Secondly, we have witnessed the global impact of the flood of charges of sexual misconduct against film producer Harvey Weinstein which led to a tsunami of similar allegations against sexually exploitative men partly supported through the social media #MeToo campaign. This became a tipping point for sexual harassment to be taken seriously with all kinds of repercussions for related gender-equality concerns such as the gender pay gap , domestic violence and equal representation in government (I write exactly 100 years after the Representation of the People Act 1918 that enabled some women over the age of 30 to vote for the first time in the UK parliament)
At first glance these gender issues may not appear to have anything very much to do with the encouragement of men into early childhood education. At second glance they have everything to do with it. The greater involvement of men in the care and education of young children has the potential to transform gender relations (Connell 1995; Williams 1995; Murray 1996; King 1998; Drudy et al. 2005; Warin 2006, 2017b). The inclusion of more male teachers and carers in the ECEC workforce can make a vital contribution to the ongoing development of a more gender-egalitarian society. This strategy has been recognised in some countries, especially those which are good at joined-up gender thinking. Such countries recognise the interdependency of social, educational, welfare and economic policies within the progression towards gender equality. For example, the Norwegian Governmentâs Ministry of Children, Equality and Social Inclusion has put together a series of gender equality action plans during the last decade where a specific policy on the inclusion of more men working in kindergartens (with a set target for success) is set out alongside family-friendly working policies: plans for equal representation in government, equal pay and freedom from violence and sexual abuse.
In writing this book I have various audiences in mind who all have a vested interest in the topic of promoting male participation in the ECEC workforce : policymakers, practitioners and academics and especially those who span these three groups. The book is intended for an academic audience of students, at undergraduate and postgraduate levels, who want to theorise about the value of increasing the number of male early childhood workers. It is intended for the increasing number of academic researchers with interests in this topic who may be found across the globe since the low level of menâs engagement in the early years of education is a worldwide phenomenon. I hope it will be read by practitioners working in ECEC: preschool and in the years of primary school. Male practitioners are more likely to be drawn to the title of this book, but I sincerely hope that their female colleagues might read this too. Indeed, it would make an excellent tool for a whole school/setting staff discussion of gender diversity. It is aimed at those who are in a position to develop policy concerning the inclusion of men working in preschools, such as national government civil servants working on education and childcare policies relating to our youngest children. I hope that this will be read by those who make policy at a more local level such as managers and leaders of early childhood educational settings, for example heads of primary and infant schools, who are positioned to make strategic decisions about the composition of their staff team. I see this book as a support for those who want to develop âwhole schoolâ (preschool) practices around this transformational opportunity as a crucial element of an overall emphasis on understanding diversity. My aim is to establish stronger and clearer rationale for policies that recruit , train and retain men.
An inspiration for the book has been the waiver of interest from early years practitioners in England. In February 2016 there was a landmark practitioner-based conference held at Southampton and initiated by the dynamic leader of Paint Pots Nurseries, David Wright , together with his colleague Gary Crawford, programme leader of Health and Social Care at Southampton City College. Entitled Early Years, A Career for Everyone, the conference drew together over 120 interested parties, professionals and others, with lively debates about the setting of an explicit national target to increase the number of men and the production of a national charter for men in early years. This was followed by a second national conference in the north of England, 2017, organised by Bradford Men in Early Years group with a specific focus on multiagency engagement of men in the early years, with a third planned in Bristol for summer 2018. Meanwhile there has been an increase in the number of local support groups in various UK cities such as Bristol, Bradford, York and Sheffield and in London with the growing expertise of London Early Years Foundation (LEYF) on this topic, and in Tower Hamlets . As an academic researcher working in this area I have been invited to a number of these groups to bridge the gap between research and practice. This engagement has given rise to my strong sense of there being a momentum, on the ground, amongst practitioners, and it has fed my intention to be sure that this movement has a firm footing in a sound theoretical basis and in the accumulated research knowledge.
A call for more men in the nursery seems, at first glance, to be straightforward, practical and unproblematic, although hard to achieve. However, this is a highly contested area when we look at the different reasons that lie behind this drive. Some people believe that we need more men to work with young children because we have to re-assert some kind of discipline within a âbroken societyâ and for these people men seem likely to serve that aim. There was a typical example of this kind of thinking when David Cameron blamed father-absent families for a spate of riots in summer 2011. The âTroops to Teachers â initiative in the UK, copied from a US policy idea, symbolises this kind of approach. Others, however, believe that the inclusion of more men in early childhood education has the potential to challenge traditional gender roles and that it is a small step in the direction of âundoingâ gender and moving beyond the gender binary.
It may seem like a form of theoretical hair-splitting to open up a debate about reasons for recruiting and retaining more men. Why, one might ask, donât we just get on with the challenging business of recruitment and find the best ways to provide support? However, these widely different underlying rationales for the inclusion of more men influence what men actually do when they are working as part of the preschool workforce. Gender -traditional practitioners will be implicitly establishing the traditional gender order as they relate to other staff and as they work with young children. For example, you might expect to see them being brought in to deal with difficult children, especially boys, and leading outdoor activities. Gender -transformative men will deliberately look for opportunities to challenge gender stereotypes in their own behaviour and interactions with the children. For example, you might expect to see them working, alongside colleagues, undertaking activities that are traditionally coded as female activities, such as nappy (diaper ) changing or dancing.
Throughout the chapters of this book there is a clear line of argument that can act as the basis of a call for more men to work in ECEC. This is based on a passionate desire to see gender transformation in society. I am not one of those researchers who believe in the possibility of cold and emotionless objective research. I belong to a proud tradition of research by feminists and other qualitative research pioneers, who recognise that all research ...